[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current global temperature anomalies (the amount of warming or cooling reported) are estimated against an expected average of 14 °C (287 K, 57 °F) -- the guess-timated mean temperature over the period 1961-1990.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]One of the quirks of climate science is that climate models are frequently 'tuned' to reproduce the expected mean temperature of 287 K or 14 °C and, somewhat bizarrely, 14 °C is thought to be the correct figure because 'the most trusted models produce it'. While the average of model representations of global climate suggests Earth's mean temperature is about 14 °C (287 K), the 16 most trusted and 'stable' models tested in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) (see original .pdf) are not well able to reproduce this result.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]This graphic represents the unforced control runs for the "ensemble" (IPCC-speak for "haven't got a clue if any of these actually represent reality -- throw 'em all together and say the errors average out"). The range starts out guessing mean Earth surface temperature as anything from 11.5 to 16.5 °C (roughly 285-290 K) and ends -- without messing with carbon dioxide levels or anything else -- with the guesses even further apart.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]The absolute mean surface air temperature of the Earth is actually not known and there is no specification of exactly what we are trying to measure or how to go about doing so. No one knows what Earth's optimal temperature would be or how it could be knowingly and predictably adjusted even if an optimum could be agreed.[/FONT] [/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current global temperature anomalies (the amount of warming or cooling reported) are estimated against an expected average of 14 °C (287 K, 57 °F) -- the guess-timated mean temperature over the period 1961-1990.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]One of the quirks of climate science is that climate models are frequently 'tuned' to reproduce the expected mean temperature of 287 K or 14 °C and, somewhat bizarrely, 14 °C is thought to be the correct figure because 'the most trusted models produce it'. While the average of model representations of global climate suggests Earth's mean temperature is about 14 °C (287 K), the 16 most trusted and 'stable' models tested in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) (see original .pdf) are not well able to reproduce this result.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]This graphic represents the unforced control runs for the "ensemble" (IPCC-speak for "haven't got a clue if any of these actually represent reality -- throw 'em all together and say the errors average out"). The range starts out guessing mean Earth surface temperature as anything from 11.5 to 16.5 °C (roughly 285-290 K) and ends -- without messing with carbon dioxide levels or anything else -- with the guesses even further apart.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]The absolute mean surface air temperature of the Earth is actually not known and there is no specification of exactly what we are trying to measure or how to go about doing so. No one knows what Earth's optimal temperature would be or how it could be knowingly and predictably adjusted even if an optimum could be agreed.[/FONT] [/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current global temperature anomalies (the amount of warming or cooling reported) are estimated against an expected average of 14 °C (287 K, 57 °F) -- the guess-timated mean temperature over the period 1961-1990.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]One of the quirks of climate science is that climate models are frequently 'tuned' to reproduce the expected mean temperature of 287 K or 14 °C and, somewhat bizarrely, 14 °C is thought to be the correct figure because 'the most trusted models produce it'. While the average of model representations of global climate suggests Earth's mean temperature is about 14 °C (287 K), the 16 most trusted and 'stable' models tested in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) (see original .pdf) are not well able to reproduce this result.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]This graphic represents the unforced control runs for the "ensemble" (IPCC-speak for "haven't got a clue if any of these actually represent reality -- throw 'em all together and say the errors average out"). The range starts out guessing mean Earth surface temperature as anything from 11.5 to 16.5 °C (roughly 285-290 K) and ends -- without messing with carbon dioxide levels or anything else -- with the guesses even further apart.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]The absolute mean surface air temperature of the Earth is actually not known and there is no specification of exactly what we are trying to measure or how to go about doing so. No one knows what Earth's optimal temperature would be or how it could be knowingly and predictably adjusted even if an optimum could be agreed.[/FONT] [/FONT]

Yes, Junk Science, for that is what this site truly is. Junk Science. Lies, and misleading half truths.

Look at the paragraphs below. Do you see anything at all that indicate the residence time of CO2 and H2O? That is extremely important, for the residence time of less than ten days for H2O versus two hundred years for CO2 renders these paragraphs a lie formed of half truths.

Water vapor is feedback from the GHGs in the atmosphere.

Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.

In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models, Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).

The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other "minor greenhouse gases." As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.

A true year is 365.242199 every four years you get a leap year, but .242199 x 4 = .968796 thus a difference of 31204. over time that will change calendar time giving an impression that the temperature is changing. But its just the calendar getting out of sync with nature.

Yes, the water cycle means a particular water droplet is unlikely to remain in one place for long.

Since no water ever evaporates to replace it, it's clear that the amount of water is ever falling and the amount of time a particular droplet remains around is extrmely relevant

Are you saying that the following points, which the site argues quite well, are all demonstrably false?

1) Noone has a clue what the temperature of the atmosphere is 'supposed to be', so they just kinda guesstimate

2) None of the 'tested and trusted' models produce the 14-15&deg; they like to use

3) Global climatic patterns are an extremely complicated non-linear system and we don't understand it very well- we don't even know where carbon we know we're producing is disappearing to

4) carbon is but one small part of the system

5) Earth has experienced more significant climatic changes in shorter periods of time than we are alleged to be causing (see: mini ice age)

?

The only honest conclusion that can be drawn is that any 'AGW' is based on guesswork and assumptions, limited data, and questionable methodology. This calls any of the AGW crowd's 'conclusions' into question.

If a person were to look at the historical and geologic record it appears that when it was warmer things were better. The largest creatures ever to walk the Earth occured when the temperatures were much higher. So my guess is when its warmer its better.

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current global temperature anomalies (the amount of warming or cooling reported) are estimated against an expected average of 14 °C (287 K, 57 °F) -- the guess-timated mean temperature over the period 1961-1990.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]One of the quirks of climate science is that climate models are frequently 'tuned' to reproduce the expected mean temperature of 287 K or 14 °C and, somewhat bizarrely, 14 °C is thought to be the correct figure because 'the most trusted models produce it'. While the average of model representations of global climate suggests Earth's mean temperature is about 14 °C (287 K), the 16 most trusted and 'stable' models tested in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) (see original .pdf) are not well able to reproduce this result.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]This graphic represents the unforced control runs for the "ensemble" (IPCC-speak for "haven't got a clue if any of these actually represent reality -- throw 'em all together and say the errors average out"). The range starts out guessing mean Earth surface temperature as anything from 11.5 to 16.5 °C (roughly 285-290 K) and ends -- without messing with carbon dioxide levels or anything else -- with the guesses even further apart.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans serif]The absolute mean surface air temperature of the Earth is actually not known and there is no specification of exactly what we are trying to measure or how to go about doing so. No one knows what Earth's optimal temperature would be or how it could be knowingly and predictably adjusted even if an optimum could be agreed.[/FONT] [/FONT]

Yes, Junk Science, for that is what this site truly is. Junk Science. Lies, and misleading half truths.

Look at the paragraphs below. Do you see anything at all that indicate the residence time of CO2 and H2O? That is extremely important, for the residence time of less than ten days for H2O versus two hundred years for CO2 renders these paragraphs a lie formed of half truths.

Water vapor is feedback from the GHGs in the atmosphere.

Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.

In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models, Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).

The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other "minor greenhouse gases." As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.

So, water vapor, which comes almost exclusively from natural sources, is the major GHG and the "massive" amount of GHG that are man caused amount to less than 1% of the water vapor, yet you expect me to accept that man is the dominant cause of global warming?

The correct temperature has changed over the 4.5 billion years the earth has existed. The correct temperature of the Hadean Era was by definition fucking hot.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but we're only interested in the thousands of years since humans evolved, NOT billions. The correct temperature would be the correct temperature for US and AGW is all about what we're doing that could change that.

The correct temperature has changed over the 4.5 billion years the earth has existed. The correct temperature of the Hadean Era was by definition fucking hot.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but we're only interested in the thousands of years since humans evolved, NOT billions. The correct temperature would be the correct temperature for US and AGW is all about what we're doing that could change that.

Click to expand...

The earth has not been the "correct" temperature for human life as we know but for a very very small window of geologic time.

To assume the earth will be the "correct" temperature for human life as we know it for the remainder its existence is fucking stupid.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!